SCA Battlefield Heraldry & Tabards

[William of Otterton]

Ok SCA Heavy Fighters/Squires/Knights/Anyone else...

With Pennsic planning really underway now, I've been having some slightly spirited discussion with my fellow Heralds about what would make for an acceptable battlefield heavy combat tabard for the massed fights. This isn't for single combat in tournaments - just the massed field battles where there's LOTS of people fighting at once.

My personal opinion, and it's somewhat based on historical examples slightly modified for the odd nature of the SCA, is this: Basically, a tabard with the appropriate kingdom populace device on the front and back in a very large and bold set up. The wearers personal/baronial/househould/whatever device would then go on the arm flaps. The wearer's personal device could be emblazoned shield. In my world view, the allegiance to the kingdom would be greater than that of allegiance to household or other group. I believe, from comments others have made, that Calontir occasionally publishes the "standard" design for tabards in their kingdom newsletter. Is this right? Does it work?

What are some opinions on this?

I'm NOT a heavy fighter or anything like that. I'm a Canton Herald in Ealdormere, I shoot on the archery range and just barely started fencing. I'm curious to an array of opinions from as many warriors as possible - from newbie on the field to venerable Duke. I know there's some politics involved with various Households sometimes feeling that THEIR device should take precedence over their home kingdom - is this true to those of you in a household? What about the Knights?

My thanks to you all,
Griffin

[MJBlazek]

I think that two, "uniformed" forces going at it with each other sounds really cool.

easier to tell whos on your side too.


I am new to the field, and am nto a member of a household, but shoudlnt it hold that the allegence to the crown over house? Doesnt (theoretically) the king allow the households to exist in his kindgom? Dont knights and lords have to swear feality to the king?

How does the old saying go..."For King and Country"?


I for one see nothing wrong with it.

[Effingham]

It bears noting that "uniforms" are modern devopments as a rule (Templars and Hospitallars and so on being exceptions).

Look at any medieval illustration, and you see the knights and lords fighting in THEIR coat armour, not kingdom uniforms. Yes, there were occasionally "standard equipped" houses and so forth, but they were smaller units, not entire armies and so forth.

As a peer, I bear arms by royal patent, and those are the arms that I will wear at Pennsic.


Effingham

[Rev. George]

Right, but the rank and file would be wearing the colors of thier lord. We just dont have enough emphasis on heraldry. I can point out my baronies arms, and the arms of a couple groups around here. I can recognize most of the kingdom arms (the crowns help), but as for the great baronies and houses of neighboring kingdoms? no clue. House asguard (my good friend is Baldars squire) and the barony of Knotting hill coil are exceptions due to personal familiarity.

In period, I probably would know more of these (esp as a scholar and sometimes herald), but I focus my brain power on stuff like remebering causative agents of disease and the bernouli equation.

-+G

[Karen Larsdatter]

(Apologies in advance for the grumpy tone of this post. It's 3 AM here, and the poison ivy rash on my arms was keeping me awake. So now I'm down in my workroom, spreading my cantankerousness to the internet. Whee.)


Wouldn't it be more historically & heraldically appropriate to use the "populace badge" of the group to create some form of livery? The whole "X heraldic bits on the front, Y heraldic bits on the arm-flaps" thing is (IIRC) an SCA construct, and not at all historically-based (other than in the generic sense that sometimes people wore garments over their armor that had some sort of armorial decoration).

For a discussion on later 15th century livery coats, see "Livery Clothing, circa 1460-1480" (starting on page 3 of Dragon #8). Additional examples: The Buckingham Retinue Livery, or the Livery/Jacket of the Compagnie d'Ordonnance.

(I see no problem with a household wearing its own livery on the field, rather than generic populace-badge livery -- a knight wearing his arms, and his squires and men-at-arms in livery with his household badge; or a baron wearing the baronial arms, and his populace unit wearing livery based on the group's populace badge -- if it's what they want to do. The concept of an entire "side" wearing all the exact same uniform may be aesthetically pleasing, but not very medieval. It's kind of oddly sweet, in a way; y'all think you oughtta be wearing the same pretty, pretty dress when you go out as a group, but you're willing to let some people accessorize slightly differently if they want to.)

Since you're in Ealdormere, the populace badge I'd suggest using for your "Ealdormere Army" livery/uniform would be the red wolf's head on a trillium -- see http://www.goldenstag.net/MiscSCA/Kingd ... Ealdormere or http://aeg.atlantia.sca.org/projects/po ... ormere.htm -- this would be especially striking on a red ground. Be flexible about the shape of the heraldic garment as well; while we have lots of images of just one style of tabard or surcoat worn in a combat situation, it's also (usually) showing just one particular period (and often one particular combination) of armor. You might want to have different suggested styles based on different periods & styles of armor, but obviously providing a simple style that anyone can use to cover up (if they lack sewing skills, or if they just have generic or not-of-a-particular-period armor) would also be useful.

(Did some looking around, and found a picture showing a fighter wearing a tabard with this sort of design, so maybe it's something your kingdom has done in the past.)

[James B.]

My Barony wears a tabard that is standardized; the majority also have the Atlantian sea horse (Spike) on the shoulders.

Historically speaking about the 15th century men wore the livery of their lord, often I wear my household colors over my Barony's. There are some references to wearing a sash with the badge of the King you are fighting for also, worn over the lord’s livery. Sashes would look cool on the field.

[D. Sebastian]

It bears noting that "uniforms" are modern devopments as a rule (Templars and Hospitallars and so on being exceptions).

We can of course go back to the Roman Legion, or the Greek Hoplite as well.

I wear garb that is appropriate to my location (dalmatica). If a tabbard is appropriate to your persona, by all means wear one. If a surcote is appropriate go for it. Dress it up in appropriate heraldry. Look spiff, but look "right" for you time / place / station.
That's what I'd like to see.
YMMV.

(and what every you do, hide the fugly!)

[Kilkenny]

I'll address the concept of Kingdom badge first, from the perspective of a longtime knight, Duke and head of household.

I would much prefer to take the field with my unit wearing livery of *mine* with a nod to the kingdom, rather than livery of the *kingdom* with a nod to my house.

This is not because I put household ahead of kingdom, but because what I bring to my King is my Household. I would tell each Barony to field their fighters in livery of the Barony, because, again, while each Barony belongs to the King, what each Baron brings to the field for his King is the Barony.

Let the populace without allegiance to household or barony wear a Kingdom livery.

In this manner one sees the strength of the various pieces of the Kingdom and the strength of the Kingdom as a whole.

While there's a certain visual impact to hundreds of people massed in one "uniform", the visual impact of hundreds of people in dozens of different "uniforms" is, imo, much more in keeping with the appearance of a medieval battlefield.

Gavin

[InsaneIrish]

I wear garb that is appropriate to my location (dalmatica). If a tabbard is appropriate to your persona, by all means wear one. If a surcote is appropriate go for it. Dress it up in appropriate heraldry. Look spiff, but look "right" for you time / place / station.
That's what I'd like to see.
YMMV.

(and what every you do, hide the fugly!)

I am seeing this more and more. Fighters that have been playing a while, especially high level fighters are starting to wear kingdom/household livery appropriate clothing with their armour as opposed to the standard tabard.

Tabards tend to work well for newer fighters or those that don't wear livery very often.

Coming from Calontir my perspective of the SCA is sometimes scewed. We have a very long standing tradition of one kingdom one army. Calontir comes first above any household or elite unit. So, we don purple and gold tabards not only to show our support for our kingdom but also so that we are recognizable on the field.

I can't tell you how many times I have heard things like:
Man who are those purple and gold guys, there are so many?
Where's Calontir? Look for Purple and Gold and follow the singing.

[MJBlazek]

I think its a great idea though to pass these things out to people who are new...who dont have any sort of identifying marks...or ...(and heres the best part of all!) Have kits that you want to hide!


There is so much talk on here about making the feild look better! You are never going to get the feild of the SCA to look 100% accurate. Here is a great idea to make it look better, and everybody shoots it down.

[James B.]

There is so much talk on here abotu making the feild look better! You are never going to get the feild of the SCA to look 100% accurate. Here is a great idea to make it look better, and everybody shhots it down.

I am confused what idea are you speaking of?

[Gwydion Caithnes]

The whole "X heraldic bits on the front, Y heraldic bits on the arm-flaps" thing is (IIRC) an SCA construct, and not at all historically-based.

I'm not entirely sure that's the case - I think I ran across a period example of precisely this construct somewhere. I'll go digging through my books this weekend and see if I can find it.

(Of course, it could also be the tremendous amount of coffee I've consumed in the last three hours, doing all the talking...)

I also think I've seen examples of marshalling of arms on such heraldic garb, but that's another kettle of fish entirely...and again, I could be "smoking rope..." (I might be remembering an illustration in an Osprey book, rather than a period illustration...)

[James B.]

Gwydion

The typical SCA tabard is mostly based off a few extent examples of a Heralds tabard not a livery tabard or a knight’s tabard as far as I can tell. If there is a person into heraldry about (*cough* Winterfell *cough*) could you please enlighten us on the historical rules for these type of tabards.

[Karen Larsdatter]

I think its a great idea though to pass these things out to people who are new...who dont have any sort of identifying marks...or ...(and heres the best part of all!) Have kits that you want to hide!

Sure, if you need something to cover up; but to tell everyone that they gotta cover up in the exact same tabard, regardless of whether or not they might have another that they'd rather wear? I imagine there must be some people out there who actually put some thought into that sort of thing ...

There is so much talk on here abotu making the feild look better! You are never going to get the feild of the SCA to look 100% accurate. Here is a great idea to make it look better, and everybody shhots it down.

But that's the thing; it's only about creating a modern uniform aesthetic. Should we have the Ladies of the Rose on the sidelines in cheerleader uniforms with the kingdom populace badge, too? Maybe we can have pep bands, and dress the Marshalls in black-and-white striped shirts, while we're at it! And the Laurels could come out for a halftime show during the holds, with a band and a flag corps and everything!



No, you're not going to ever get the entire battlefield looking 100% accurate. But telling everyone that they must wear a non-medieval uniform so that they can create a non-medieval look -- and that units, households, etc., can't wear their own livery because it's somehow more important to look out on the field and see a hybrid-compromise uniform on every back -- that's just ... squicky. To me, at least.

If you want to wear your kingdom's populace badge as a tabard when you're fighting for your kingdom, go ahead! (Or likewise, your barony's populace badge when fighting at an interbaronial event for your barony, etc.) I'm not saying, "Ick, don't do it"; I'm offering a suggestion on (what I think is) a historically-based way to create a reasonable medieval armorial garment based on SCA heraldic tradition, but understanding at the same time that certain groups are going to opt for their own distinct look on the field, and that's perfectly okay, and in fact, more historically valid than Everyone Must Wear The Same Hodgepodge Uniform Mm-Kay?

I'm not entirely sure that's the case - I think I ran across a period example of precisely this construct somewhere. I'll go digging through my books this weekend and see if I can find it.

FWIW, what I meant by that is the convention of having, say, the kingdom's populace badge on one sleeve panel, the barony's populace badge on the other sleeve panel, and one's personal heraldry (or some other third armorial hoosefudge) as the main or central heraldry on the front and/or back.

[MJBlazek]

Should we have the Ladies of the Rose on the sidelines in cheerleader uniforms with the kingdom populace badge, too? Maybe we can have pep bands, and dress the Marshalls in black-and-white striped shirts, while we're at it! And the Laurels could come out for a halftime show during the holds, with a band and a flag corps and everything!

Now your just being silly

I must digress I have never been in a battle yet, but from looking at pictures I find it kind of hard to figure out who is on whos side.

[Gwydion Caithnes]

Yeah, as I said, I may be imagining the whole thing.

James, the "knight's tabard" might be more properly called a "heraldic surcoat," largely dependent upon the style of the garment.

I wasn't really arguing the difference between what a knight (or a member of his house) might wear, versus what a herald might wear. I was just saying that I *thought* I remembered an example of a "multi-device" construct.

And if there's precedent for a herald to do it (and I acknowledge that could be a mighty big "if," unless I can find the source I may be imagining...), might there also not be precedent for someone else to do it...?

Regardless, if I'm *not* making the whole thing up, I don't recall ever seeing representations of more than two devices on one garment.

After all, we don't wanna look like the front end of a Cadillac...or a NASCAR driver...or Lance Armstrong...

--GcW
Cleftlands Pursuivant

[James B.]

Multi-device designs were used by lords or knights who married a woman from another powerful family if I recall correctly

Example of the look:

[img]http://www.vallenajerilla.com/berceo/rioja-abierta/batalladenajera.jpg[/img]

[Gwydion Caithnes]

Hmmm...not sure which you're referring to - the banner(s) at left, or the king's banner/tabard, the device of which was (of course) his attempt to help demonstrate his claim to France, as well as England.

I think you're right about the banner, although of course this is a banner and not a martial garment.

[Karen Larsdatter]

The typical SCA tabard is mostly based off a few extent examples of a Heralds tabard not a livery tabard or a knight’s tabard as far as I can tell. If there is a person into heraldry about (*cough* Winterfell *cough*) could you please enlighten us on the historical rules for these type of tabards.

Well, I'm not *cough* Winterfell *cough* ... but I'll try ...

There are some illustrations of knights' armorial overgarments in this style -- the majority of which have seams down the sides (where it appears that heralds' tabards would be left open and unseamed on the sides). But even then, the sleeve-panels feature the same heraldry as what's on the front & back of the tabard -- just reshaped a bit to fit onto the sleeve.

Aha! Found the examples I was thinking of ... William Bruges's Garter Book (BL Stowe 594), c. 1430-1440. Granted, they're all wearing their lovely order cloaks, covering up most of their surcoats ... but in this case, we can be pretty sure that we're looking at a picture of the knights themselves, and not of their heralds, squires, etc.

(Granted, William Bruges's Garter Book is a roll of arms, and the artist may just be using a standard garment as a template on which to signify each man by his heraldry; just because they're dressed this way in the pictures doesn't necessarily mean that the garments actually existed outside the artist's imagination.)

Multi-device designs were used by lords or knights who married a woman from another powerful family if I recall correctly

That's quartering (in the case of the illustration -- I think it's England on the right, and ... er ... dang, these Chronicles look all alike to me! -- the flag on the left makes me want to say Castile?) -- but notice that even though the heraldry is marshalled together from two different elements, it's still treated as one cohesive device -- you don't have the King of England wearing the French fleurs-de-lys on his sleeves and the English lions down his front & back.

[Gwydion Caithnes]

There we go. Not the example I was thinking of, but it serves quite nicely. Under the cloaks, those Garters are obviously wearing surcoats with two marshalled devices on them.

But you're right - that's different from the sleeves. AND that the pic may not represent reality...

But I swear I saw something, somewhere...I'll look for it.

[Effingham]

Under the cloaks, those Garters are obviously wearing surcoats with two marshalled devices on them

No, that's *one* marshalled arms.

When different armorial bearings are marshalled, they become ONE coat of arms. The different "parts" are not divisible for some odd mix-and-match idea.

Effingham

[Gwydion Caithnes]

Under the cloaks, those Garters are obviously wearing surcoats with two marshalled devices on them

No, that's *one* marshalled arms.

When different armorial bearings are marshalled, they become ONE coat of arms. The different "parts" are not divisible for some odd mix-and-match idea.

Effingham

Uh...never suggested they were. Depends on how you read my sentence - guess I should have said "two devices that are marshalled."

[Effingham]

Ah, okay. I was looking at it as following the bit about dividing heradic bits on different parts of the coat...


Effingham

[Kevin]

From King Rene's Tournament Book:

Hereafter follows the fashion and style in which ought to be made the harness for the head, body and arms, shields and mantlings that one calls, in Flanders and in Brabant and in those noble countries where tourneys are commonly held, mantlings or achievements, coats of arms, saddles, trappers and horsecloths for horses, maces and swords for tourneying. [...] The surcoat ought to be made like that of a herald, except that there should not be a pleat over the body, in order to better display the wearer's coat of arms.

Now then, about those Ladies of the Rose cheerleaders...

[William of Otterton]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. My apologies for apparently abandoning this thread, but I was away at Ealdormere's Trillium War over the weekend and just returned home. There's some fantastic ideas, and thank you to those for providing some feedback on to the "why" of your ideas too.

The reason this was posted here in the "Interpretive" instead of the "Historical" section was simple. I realize that there's NO way of making an accurate SCA style battlefield dress with such a diverse number of periods and armour styles on the field. If it was for a living history style company, it would be much simpler to do. The SCA being what it is for timeframe though...

The core of this discussion came out of Queen Rustique's whim of seeing a "Sea of Red" at Pennsic on the Field Battles. Is the uniform idea "period" or accurate.. no, not really. We had a few good campfire discussions about the idea with a few Knights and the KEM throwing their feedback to me as well. However, all that came out of it was more questions. This, in a way, is a good thing and gives the Ealdormere College of Heralds much more to think about.

I agree "uniforms" are too late for SCA period fighting. If we can come up with a decent compromise for the surcoat and non-surcoat crowds, it would be a good compromise I think. Perhaps more banners for next year so that the households and Baronies can show their strength AND their allegience too.

Thanks again.
GdS

[Rev. George]

My thoughts on the matter- as I have pointed out many times.

The ideal solution would be to assume that your persona was told by his king/ daymio/ kahn/ krohl/ etc that he should wear red, or the archers/cannons/seige engines would fire on him by accident.

Then look at your persona and answer the following question: What would I have worn had I been given that order?

For some it would be a surcote. For others a tunic, some a joupon, maybe a giant horsehair crest, etc. Perhaps a painted mempo and some plumes

It wouldnt be a uniform, but it would be obvious who was on your side.

-+G

[William of Otterton]

My thoughts on the matter- as I have pointed out many times.

The ideal solution would be to assume that your persona was told by his king/ daymio/ kahn/ krohl/ etc that he should wear red, or the archers/cannons/seige engines would fire on him by accident.

Then look at your persona and answer the following question: What would I have worn had I been given that order?

For some it would be a surcote. For others a tunic, some a joupon, maybe a giant horsehair crest, etc. Perhaps a painted mempo and some plumes

It wouldnt be a uniform, but it would be obvious who was on your side.

-+G

That's actually a really good answer. Thanks